similar to: automatic client startup on OSS's

Hi all, we use SLES 11 and Lustre 1.8.1.1 + patches and like convert a lustre FS using external journals to one with async journals enabled. Question is whether the procedure: umount <filesystem> on all clients umount <osts> on all OSSes e2fsck <ost-device> on all OSSes for all all OSTs tune2fs -O ^has_journal <ost-device> on all

I installed 1 MDS , 2 OSS/OST and 2 Lustre Client. My MDS shows: [code] [root at MDS ~]# lctl list_nids 10.94.214.185 at tcp [root at MDS ~]# [/code] On Lustre Client1: [code] [root at lustreclient1 lustre]# lfs df -h UUID bytes Used Available Use% Mounted on lustre-MDT0000_UUID 4.5G 274.3M 3.9G 6% /mnt/lustre[MDT:0]

I installed 1 MDS , 2 OSS/OST and 2 Lustre Client. My MDS shows: [code] [root at MDS ~]# lctl list_nids 10.94.214.185 at tcp [root at MDS ~]# [/code] On Lustre Client1: [code] [root at lustreclient1 lustre]# lfs df -h UUID bytes Used Available Use% Mounted on lustre-MDT0000_UUID 4.5G 274.3M 3.9G 6% /mnt/lustre[MDT:0] lustre-OST0000_UUID

Hello, We have running lustre 1.8.1 and have met "No space lest on device" error when uploading 500 Gb small files (less then 100 Kb each). The problem seems to depends on the number of files. If we remove one file, we can create one new file, even with Gb size; but if we haven''t remove something we can''t create even very little file, as an example using touch

Hi, We''re setting up fairly large Lustre 2.1.2 filesystems, each with 18 nodes and 159 resources all in one Corosync/Pacemaker cluster as suggested by our vendor. We''re getting mixed messages on how large of a Corosync/Pacemaker cluster will work well between our vendor an others. 1. Are there Lustre Corosync/Pacemaker clusters out there of this size or larger? 2.

Hi all, after installing a Lustre test file system consisting of 34 OSTs, I encountered a strange error when trying to set up quotas: lfs quotacheck gave me an "Input/Output error", while in /var/log/kern.log I found a Lustre error LustreError: 20807:0:(quota_check.c:227:lov_quota_check()) lov idx 32 inactive Indeed, in /proc/fs/lustre/lov/.../target_obd all 34 OSTs were listed

Hi everyone, I have seen this question here before, but without a very satisfactory answer. One of our half a dozen clients has lost access to a set of OSTs: > lfs osts OBDS:: 0: lustre-OST0000_UUID ACTIVE 1: lustre-OST0001_UUID ACTIVE 2: lustre-OST0002_UUID INACTIVE 3: lustre-OST0003_UUID INACTIVE 4: lustre-OST0004_UUID INACTIVE 5: lustre-OST0005_UUID ACTIVE 6: lustre-OST0006_UUID ACTIVE

I''m evaluating lustre. I''m trying what I think is a basic/simple ethernet config. with MDT and OST on the same node. Can someone tell me if the following (~150 second recovery occurring when small 190 GB OST is re-mounted) is expected behavior or if I''m missing something? I thought I would send this and continue with the eval while awaiting a response. I''m using

Hello, When I run a "df -i" in my clients I get 95% indes used or 5% inodes free: Filesystem Inodes IUsed IFree IUse% Mounted on lustre-mds-01:lustre-mds-02:/cetafs 22200087 20949839 1250248 95% /mnt/data But if I run lfs df -i i get: UUID Inodes IUsed IFree I

Hi, I get the following error when I try to mount lustre on the clients. Permanent disk data: Target: lustre-OSTffff Index: unassigned Lustre FS: lustre Mount type: ldiskfs Flags: 0x72 (OST needs_index first_time update ) Persistent mount opts: errors=remount-ro,extents,mballoc Parameters: mgsnode=164.107.119.231 at tcp sh: losetup: command not found mkfs.lustre: error 32512 on losetup:

We are seeing some disturbing (probably due to our ignorance) behavior from lustre 1.6.3 right now. We have 8 OSSs with 3 OSTs per OSS (24 physical LUNs). We just created a brand new lustre file system across this configuration using the default mkfs.lustre formatting options. We have this file system mounted across 400 clients. At the moment, we have 63 IOzone threads running

Dear All, We have a small setup of lustre with 7 OSTs on 8gb FC . We have kept one OST per FC port. We have lustre 2.3 with CentOS 6.3. There are 32 clients which access this over FDR IB. We can achieve more than 1.3GB/s throughput using IOR, without cache. Which is roughly 185MB/s per OST. We wanted to know if this is normal. Should we expect more from 8gb FC port. OSTs are on 8+2 RAID6 .

Hello everybody, at the following pages: http://www.rit.edu/~rc/docs/Survey_of_Clustered_Parallel_File_Systems_004_LANL.ppt http://www.intel.com/cd/ids/developer/asmo-na/eng/dc/tools/threading/238284.htm?page=2 I read: "[...] Currently, one additional drawback to Lustre is that a Lustre client cannot be on a server that is providing OSTs. This solution is being worked on and may be

Greetings-- Packages for Lustre 1.0.2 are now available in the usual place http://www.clusterfs.com/download.html This bug-fix release resolves a number of issues, of which a few are user-visible: - the default debug level is now a more reasonable production value - zero-copy TCP is now enabled by default, if your hardware supports it - you should encounter fewer allocation failures

Greetings-- Packages for Lustre 1.0.2 are now available in the usual place http://www.clusterfs.com/download.html This bug-fix release resolves a number of issues, of which a few are user-visible: - the default debug level is now a more reasonable production value - zero-copy TCP is now enabled by default, if your hardware supports it - you should encounter fewer allocation failures

Hello, we wounder whether is it possible to add OSTs to the Lustre with quota support without making it offline? We tried to do this but all quota information was lost. Despite the fact that OST was formatted with quota support we are receiving this error message: Lustre: 3743:0:(lproc_quota.c:447:lprocfs_quota_wr_type()) lustrefs-OST0016: quotaon failed because quota files

Hi all, Lustre 1.8.4 is available on the Oracle Download Center Site. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/indexes/downloads/sun-az-index-095901.html#L The change log can be read here: http://wiki.lustre.org/index.php/Use:Change_Log_1.8 Here are some items that may interest you in this release: * Changes to support matrix - Update RHEL5.5 kernel to 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 Update OEL5.5

Hi all, Lustre 1.8.4 is available on the Oracle Download Center Site. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/indexes/downloads/sun-az-index-095901.html#L The change log can be read here: http://wiki.lustre.org/index.php/Use:Change_Log_1.8 Here are some items that may interest you in this release: * Changes to support matrix - Update RHEL5.5 kernel to 2.6.18-194.3.1.el5 Update OEL5.5

Just checking to be sure this isn''t a known bug or problem. I couldn''t find a bz for this, but it would appear that tunefs.lustre --print fails on a lustre mdt or ost device if mounted with mmp. Is this expected behavior? TIA mds1-gps:~ # tunefs.lustre --print /dev/mapper/mdt1 checking for existing Lustre data: not found tunefs.lustre FATAL: Device /dev/mapper/mdt1 has not

All, I''ve added a new 2.2 TB OST to my cluster easily enough, but this new disk array is meant to replace several smaller OSTs that I used to have of which were only 120 GB, 500 GB, and 700 GB. Adding an OST is easy, but how do I REMOVE the small OSTs that I no longer want to be part of my cluster? Is there a command to tell luster to move all the file stripes off one of the nodes?